Disciplinary Actions Taken by the
Virginia State Bar

On June
27, 2003, the Disciplinary Board recommended that
the Supreme Court of Virginia grant Douglas Downes
Wilson's petition for reinstatement of his license
to practice law. The recommendation will be filed
with the court, which will take final action on
Mr. Wilson's petition.

On
June 27, 2003, the Virginia State Bar Disciplinary Board
revoked Clayman Ricardo Norfleet's law license for violating
a number of rules of professional conduct. The board
found that Mr. Norfleet practiced law while administratively
suspended; failed to return unearned fees; failed to
account to his clients; failed to communicate; committed
deliberately wrongful acts that reflected adversely
on his honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer;
and engaged in professional conduct involving dishonesty,
fraud, deceit or misrepresentation.

On
June 27, 2003, the Virginia State Bar Disciplinary Board
revoked Luther Cornelius Edmonds' law license effective
immediately. The underlying misconduct was Mr. Edmonds'
felony convictions for unlawful wounding and wearing a
mask stemming from a physical attack on lawyer and former
state delegate William P. Robinson, Jr.

*
On August 21, 2003, Mr. Edmonds filed an appeal to the
Virginia Supreme Court.

On
June 24, 2003, by agreed disposition, a subcommittee
of the Virginia State Bar Second District publically
reprimanded Dwayne Bernard Strothers for failing to
competently handle the appeal of his client's criminal
conviction, failing to keep his client advised of the
status of the appeal, and failing to turn over the file
to the client when the client requested it. The subcommittee
found that after accepting a court appointment for the
initial appeal, Mr. Strothers did not communicate with
his client for twenty three months despite his client's
requests for information. In attempting to appeal his
client's conviction to the Virginia Supreme Court, Mr.
Strothers filed a notice of appeal in the wrong court
and failed to file any further pleadings.

On June 17, 2003, a subcommittee of the Virginia State
Bar Fifth District Committee imposed a public reprimand
with terms on Charles James Swedish. This was an agreed
disposition of misconduct charges in a divorce matter
and three criminal matters. The subcommittee found a pattern
of neglect, failure to communicate, failure to return
a client file, failure to provide an accounting, and failure
to place an advance payment of fees in his trust account.

On June 17, 2003 the Virginia State Bar Sixth District
Committee issued a public reprimand to Timothy Scott Renick.
This was an agreed disposition of misconduct charges in
two cases. In a bankruptcy matter, the committee found
that Mr. Renick violated disciplinary rules pertaining
to lack of diligence, failure to communicate, receiving
an unreasonable fee, and engaging in professional conduct
involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation.
In the second case, the committee found that Mr. Renick
violated disciplinary rules pertaining to lack of competence
and diligence in the administration of two estates.

On
June 17, 2003, the Third District Committee, Section
II, sanctioned James Grandison Harrison, III for causing
a television advertisement called the "Trainer" to be
broadcast for his law firm, Marks & Harrison. The
district committee unanimously found that the advertisement
is false, fraudulent, misleading or deceptive. The district
committee dismissed the complaint with terms, a sanction
that creates a disciplinary record. The terms require
inclusion, in current and future advertisements broadcast
as part of the advertising campaign, of disclaimers
of a specified size, contrast and duration. The disclaimers
must advise viewers that "the outcome of your case depends
upon its facts and merits and is not guaranteed" and
that "no comparison with other lawyers or firms is stated
or implied."

*NOTICE
OF CORRECTION: The summary of this matter posted on
this site from June 20 until June 24, 2003, should
be disregarded. The district committee will issue
a written determination giving the reasons for its
June 17 decision. When the determination is issued
it will be posted here.

On June 17,
2003, the Third District Committee, Section II, sanctioned
James Alfred McCauley for causing four television advertisements
 "Shredder," "Strategy Session," "Stonewall" and
"Choker"  to be broadcast for his law firm, Marks
& Harrison. In a unanimous ruling, the district
committee found that the advertisements are false, fraudulent,
misleading or deceptive. The district committee imposed
a dismissal with terms, a sanction that creates a disciplinary
record. The terms require the inclusion, in all current
and future advertisements run as part of the advertising
campaign, of disclaimers of a specified size, contrast,
and duration. The disclaimers must advise viewers that
"the outcome of your case depends upon its facts and
merits and is not guaranteed" and "no comparison with
other lawyers or firms is stated or implied."

*NOTICE
OF CORRECTION: The summary of this matter posted
on this site from June 20 until June 24, 2003, should
be disregarded. The district committee will issue
a written determination giving the reasons for its
June 17 decision. When the determination is issued
it will be posted here.

On June 18, 2003, in an agreed disposition, the Virginia
State Bar Disciplinary Board issued a public reprimand
with terms to David Redden. Mr. Redden
overdrew his attorney trust account on two occasions.
His bank paid both of the overdrafts, and there was no
loss of client funds. The error resulted from his failure
to adequately reconcile the account. In the event that
Mr. Redden does not comply with the remedial terms imposed
by the board, his license will be suspended for one year.

On
June 13, 2003, the Virginia State Bar Third District Committee,
Section II imposed a dismissal with terms on Thomas Hunt
Roberts.The committee found that Mr.
Roberts facilitated a loan to his litigation client through
a corporation in which Mr. Roberts was the only officer
as well as either the only stockholder or the majority
stockholder. Roberts maintained that the corporation was
acting as an agent for the true lender.

On June
11, 2003, following a show cause hearing, the Virginia
State Bar Third District Committee, Section I, publicly
reprimanded Beverly McLean Murray for failing to comply
with a term imposed in connection with a private reprimand.
In February 2003, the district committee privately reprimanded
Ms. Murray after she admitted that she failed to communicate
with a client and to represent the client in a competent
and diligent manner. The term imposed required Ms. Murray
to refund $600 the client had paid her. Ms. Murray failed
to refund her fee in a timely manner. Therefore, the district
committee issued a public reprimand, the alternate sanction
provided in the agreed disposition of the underlying disciplinary
matter.

On May
27, 2003, the Virginia State Bar Seventh District Committee
issued a public reprimand with terms to Jeffrey Frederick
Bradley for misconduct in handling a client's insurance
claim. The committee found that Mr. Bradley did not handle
the matter diligently, did not return most of his client's
telephone calls, and did not keep her informed about the
status of the matter. In addition, Mr. Bradley lost or
misplaced the file. When the client requested her file,
Mr. Bradley could not return it and did not tell her it
was lost.

A three-judge
panel of the Circuit Court for the County of Montgomery
suspended Joseph Graham Painter, Jr.'s,license
to practice law for twelve months, effective June 16,
2003. The parties stipulated Mr. Painter violated the
Rules of Professional conduct by setting several fires
in the area behind his home. Mr. Painter had previously
pled guilty and no contest to several misdemeanor charges
related to the fires.

June
4, 2003*

Gregory
Lane Sandler, 413 West York Street, Norfolk, Virginia
23510

VSB
Docket No. 02-021-2478

On
May 28, 2003, the Virginia State Bar Second District Committee,
Section I issued a public reprimand to Gregory Lane Sandler.
The panel found that Mr. Sandler did not communicate with
his personal injury client for more than two months after
the client wrote to complain about his handling of the
case and his failure to substantively communicate with
her.

On May 13, 2003, the Virginia State Bar Sixth District
Committee imposed a public reprimand on Carl Randall Stone.
The committee found that Mr. Stone had not complied with
the terms of a June 3, 2002, order of the Sixth District
Subcommittee. The 2002 order sanctioned Mr. Stone for
failing to handle a workers compensation case competently
and promptly and for not zealously representing his client.

On
May 29, 2003, the Virginia State Bar Ninth District Committee
issued a public reprimand to James Clifford Reeves, III
for failing to adequately communicate with a North Carolina
client. By agreed disposition, the committee found that
for a number of months Mr. Reeves failed to adequately
communicate with the client regarding the litigation of
her interests in her former marital home in Virginia.

On May 21, 2003, the Virginia State Bar Disciplinary Board
issued, by agreement, a public reprimand to Khalil Wali
Latif for failing to perfect an appeal of a criminal matter
to the Virginia Court of Appeals, failing to advise his
client that the appeal had been dismissed and failing
to communicate with his client.

On May 21, 2003, the Virginia State Bar Disciplinary Board
imposed, by agreement, in eight disciplinary matters,
a four-month suspension with terms upon Khalil Wali Latif.
The terms are effective immediately. The suspension will
take effect on September 1, 2003.

VSB Docket No. 03-000-0376 arose from a federal district
court holding Mr. Latif in civil and criminal contempt
for failing to take court ordered action. Mr. Latif repeatedly
failed to appear in bankruptcy court when ordered to do
so, did not pay fines the bankruptcy court imposed and
neglected to file a written response to the resulting
contempt allegations. The federal district court initially
barred Mr. Latif from practicing law in any federal court
in the Western District of Virginia for a period of eight
months but, after referring the matter to the bar, stayed
the suspension. The Disciplinary Board found that Mr.
Latif's failure to comply with some of the bankruptcy
court orders resulted from his failure to supervise his
secretary, who did not disclose correspondence from the
court and the bar to Mr. Latif. However, the Disciplinary
Board did find that Mr. Latif knowingly disobeyed the
federal district court's order requiring him to submit
a written response to the contempt allegations.

In the seven other matters, by failing to maintain the
requisite trust account records and not properly supervising
his secretary, Mr. Latif enabled her to engage in conduct
incompatible with his professional obligations as a lawyer.
Over a period of several months, the bar attempted to
notify Mr. Latif of numerous trust account overdrafts,
but his secretary apparently diverted the overdraft notices
and forged Mr. Latif's name to a letter to the bar attempting
to explain the overdrafts. An investigation commissioned
by Mr. Latif revealed that his secretary had embezzled
funds.

In imposing a four month suspension with terms, the board
considered Mr. Latif's prior disciplinary record and the
fact that his misconduct did not result in any client
losses. The terms require Mr. Latif, for a two-year period
beginning immediately, to consult with a practice mentor
about law office management, employ a part-time bookkeeper
and engage a certified public accountant to audit his
trust account records quarterly. The terms also bar Mr.
Latif from accepting any new clients or client matters
between May 21 and September 1, 2003, when the four-month
suspension takes effect.

On May 21, 2003, pursuant to an agreed disposition, the
Virginia State Bar Third District Committee, Section I
publicly reprimanded Khalil Wali Latif. He accepted a
$200 fee for filing a bankruptcy petition, cashed the
client's check rather than depositing it in his trust
account, then failed to file the petition.

On
May 16, 2003, the Virginia State Bar Disciplinary Board
revoked Robert Sidney Ricks's license to practice law
in Virginia. The board considered fifteen complaints of
misconduct, many of which involved embezzlement of client
funds by Mr. Ricks's former secretary, who he continued
to employ after he discovered she was stealing, thereby
allowing the defalcations to continue. The board also
found that Mr. Ricks was indifferent to the plight of
clients dunned by creditors who would have been paid were
it not for the embezzlements. Other complaints involved
the dismissal of personal injury cases that Mr. Ricks
failed to pursue diligently, as well as his failure to
perform work that he was paid to do and to issue refunds
when he did not do the work.

On May
15, 2003, the Virginia State Bar Disciplinary Board suspended
Sang Kuen Park's license to practice law for six months.
The board found that Mr. Park performed incompetently
and made misrepresentations regarding the drafting and
execution of a will and the filing of an immigration petition.

On May 16, 2003, the Virginia State Bar Disciplinary
Board issued a public reprimand to Helena Daphne Mizrahi.
The board found that Ms. Mizrahi engaged in misleading
and deceptive conduct in the course of her representation
in a domestic relations matter.

On May 8, 2003, the Virginia State Bar Disciplinary Board
issued a public reprimand to Sang Kuen Park.This
was an agreed disposition of disciplinary charges against
Mr. Park. Mr. Park was hired to assist a married couple
in obtaining work visas and permanent resident status.
He did not file the correct filing fee for the work visas,
delaying the issuance of the visas, and then misrepresented
the reason for the delay. He also did not file the applications
for permanent resident status but for 18 months assured
his clients that he had done so. Mr. Park failed to file
an updated labor certification with his clients' petitions
for extension of their visas Mr. Park's clients sued him
for malpractice and won a judgment against him for $35,000.00,
which he paid.

On April
28, 2003, the Seventh District Subcommittee of the Virginia
State Bar issued a public reprimand with terms to William
Madison McClenny, Jr.. Mr. McClenny was hired to represent
a defendant in several traffic matters. He told the client
that the matters were continued and that he did not have
to appear. In fact, Mr. McClenny failed to have the cases
continued, and the client was convicted in his absence.
The cases were resolved after the client filed a pro se
motion to rehear.

On April 25, 2003, the Virginia State Bar Disciplinary
Board revoked Joseph Dee Morrissey's license to practice
law. By unanimous decision, the board found that Mr. Morrissey
did not to comply with former Va. S. Ct. R. Part 6, §IV,
¶13.K(1) following the December 2000 suspension of
his license. The rule requires an attorney whose license
has been suspended to promptly notify all clients, judges
and opposing counsel in pending litigation and to furnish
proof of the notifications to the Virginia State Bar.
The rule also requires an attorney to make appropriate
arrangements for the disposition of client matters in
conformity with the clients' wishes. The board found that
Mr. Morrissey's multiple violations of the rule, coupled
with his lengthy disciplinary record, warranted the revocation
of his license.

On April
25, 2003, the Virginia State Bar Disciplinary Board suspended
Roger Cory Hinde's license to practice law for four years.
In addition to trust account record keeping violations,
lack of diligence, failure to communicate with a client
and filing a non-meritorious action, the Disciplinary
Board found that in each of the four cases Mr. Hinde had
failed to respond to lawful requests for information from
the bar and obstructed the bar's lawful investigation
of the complaints. Mr. Hinde violated the disciplinary
rule requiring attorneys to respond to lawful requests
for information from the bar by failing to file a written
response to any of the bar complaints, failing to submit
to an interview by a bar investigation, failing to comply
with subpoenae duces tecum until he was administratively
suspended, failing to answer the certification, failing
to designate witnesses or exhibits in the board proceeding
and failing to appear for the pre-hearing conference.

On April
3, 2003, the Virginia State Bar Disciplinary Board summarily
suspended Edmund Arthur Matricardi, III's license to practice
law. On April 1, 2003, Mr. Matricardi entered a plea of
guilty to charges of interception of a wire communication,
in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section
2511(1)(a). Mr. Matricardi obtained the dial-in telephone
number and participation code that allowed access to a
March 22, 2002, Joint Democratic Caucus conference call
to which he was not invited. Mr. Matricardi used this
telephone number and participation code to dial into the
conference call, did not disclose his presence on the
line, and tape recorded the call for approximately two
and one half hours. The board ordered Mr. Matricardi to
appear on April 25, 2003, to determine whether revocation
or further suspension of his license is appropriate.

*On
April 14, 2003, Edward Arthur Matricardi, III, filed a
demand that the proceedings before the Disciplinary Board
be terminated and that further proceedings be conducted
pursuant to VA. Code Section 54.1-3935. Therefore,
the Disciplinary Board hearing scheduled for April 25,
2003, is hereby canceled.

On
March 21, 2003, the Virginia State Bar Fifth District
Committee Section I publically reprimanded John Robert
Sandin. This was an agreed disposition of misconduct
charges against Mr. Sandin.The committee found that Mr. Sandin did not keep
a client informed of the status of her personal injury
case and failed to respond her phone calls and written
inquiries for months. He neglected the case and non-suited it without his client s
permission.He
did not re-file the case or inform the client that she
could do so.

Mr.
Sandin entered into a consent judgment in favor of his
client for damages resulting from his malpractice.

On March 28, 2003, the Virginia State Bar Disciplinary
Board revoked Victor Alan Motley's license
to practice law for misconduct in two cases. In the first
case, the board found that Mr. Motley failed to follow
trust account requirements. In the second, the board found
that Mr. Motley engaged in the unauthorized practice of
law while his license was suspended and in professional
conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation.
In both cases, the board found that he committed a crime
or deliberately wrongful act that reflected adversely
on his fitness to practice law.

Mr. Motley's license was suspended on November 30, 2000,
and has remained suspended since that time.

On March 28, 2003, the Virginia State Bar Disciplinary
Board suspended Jeffrey Bourke Rice's
license to practice law for one year. The board found
that Mr. Rice failed to act with diligence and promptness
on behalf of a client who hired him to seek a reduction
of his sentence in a criminal matter. The board also found
the Mr. Rice failed to appear for a district committee
hearing after being served personally with a subpoena.
Mr. Rice has a prior disciplinary record.

*On
April 1, 2003, Mr. Rice filed an appeal to the Supreme
Court of Virginia.

**On
April 2, 2003, the Virginia Supreme Court stayed the one
year suspension pending appeal.

On March
28, 2003, the Virginia State Bar Disciplinary Board suspended
John Kelly Dixon, III's license to practice law in Virginia
for five years with terms. Mr. Dixon failed to deposit
client fees in his attorney trust account, handle client
matters promptly and respond to clients' inquiries. Mr.
Dixon had no prior disciplinary record. The terms imposed
in connection with the suspension require Mr. Dixon to
maintain a current address of record with the bar and
return client files promptly upon request. If Mr. Dixon
fails to comply with the terms, his license to practice
law in Virginia will be revoked.

On
March 20, 2003, pursuant to an agreed disposition, the
Virginia State Bar Disciplinary Board, suspended John
Henry Partridge's license to practice law for a period
of thirty months, effective May 1, 2003, directed him
to make certain payments to former clients, and required
him to engage the services of a law office management
consultant under certain circumstances upon his return
to the private practice of law. The board also ordered
that Mr. Partridge's license be revoked in the event of
noncompliance with the terms of discipline imposed.

Among
other things, the board found that Mr. Partridge failed
to place legal fees in an attorney trust account prior
to his having earned them; failed to provide accountings
to clients for fees claimed to have been earned; failed
to attend promptly to matters undertaken for clients;
failed to communicate with clients; provided a court with
a false reason for needing an extension of time in which
to serve process; filed a "pro se" lawsuit on behalf of
a client whom he represented at the time of filing; and
failed to respond to bar complaints.

On
March 13, 2003, the Disciplinary Board summarily suspended
Robert M. Short's license to practice law in the Commonwealth
of Virginia. On March 12, 2003, a receiver was appointed
to take over Mr. Short's law practice. In February, Mr.
Short stole approximately $400,000 from the trust account
of the law firm that rented him office space in Vienna,
Virginia. Shortly thereafter, he abandoned his law practice
and clients, and left town. On February 27, 2003, he was
arrested in Kansas on drug charges, and over $200,000
was confiscated from his automobile. Mr. Short was released
and his whereabouts are unknown. An expedited hearing
is set for March 28, 2003 to determine whether Mr. Short's
law license should be revoked.

*On
March 28, 2003, the Disciplinary Board revoked Robert
Michael Shorts license to practice law in Virginia.

On
March 7, 2003, Kelly Kathleen Latimer consented to the
revocation of her license to practice law in Virginia.
Ms Latimer surrendered her license on the same day she
pled guilty in the United States District Court for the
Eastern District of Virginia to one count of conspiracy
to distribute cocaine base("crack") and one count of conspiracy
to distribute cocaine.

March
4, 2003

James F. Pascal, 11417 Hilbingdon Road, Richmond,
Virginia 23233.

VSB Docket No. 03-031-2021

On February 12, 2003, the Third District Committee, Section
I, held a show cause hearing to determine whether James
F. Pascal had complied with terms issued in connection
with a private reprimand. The terms required him to certify
to bar counsel every six months that he is maintaining
and using an attorney trust account, to obtain six hours
of CLE credit in law office management and to submit to
random audits of his trust account records by the bar
no more than twice a year for two years. After an evidentiary
hearing, the committee determined that Mr. Pascal had
failed to comply with each of these terms and imposed
the alternate sanction of a public reprimand.

On
February 27, 2003, the Virginia State Bar Disciplinary
Board entered an admonition against Lee Robert Arzt on
a charge that he committed a crime or other deliberately
wrongful act that reflected adversely on his fitness to
practice law. The charge arose from Mr. Arzt engaging
in sexual activity with a client at a time when he knew
the client to be receiving medications and therapy for
her emotional and psychiatric condition. A charge alleging
failure to inform his client of pertinent communications
from a third party was dismissed. In determining to impose
an admonition, the board considered Mr. Arzt's lack of
any prior record of discipline over 31 years of practice
and the impact of this public finding of an ethical violation,
his cooperation (Mr. Arzt and the bar expedited the hearing
by entering into over 125 factual stipulations), his demonstrated
remorse for his conduct, and the fact that he had already
sought counseling with regard to this incident and his
role in it.

On February
26, 2003, Rickey Gene Young consented to revocation of
his license to practice law rather than defend nine pending
misconduct complaints. The most serious allegations were
misdemeanor convictions for violating a court order in
2001 and for failing to file tax returns from 1993 through
1997. Mr. Young consented to the revocation after the
Virginia State Bar Disciplinary Board appointed a guardian
ad litem to represent him.

On
February 28, 2003, the Virginia State Bar Disciplinary
Board issued an admonition against Arnold Reginald Henderson,
V. The board found that Mr. Henderson knowingly made a
false statement of fact to a tribunal, and offered evidence
that he knew to be false and had engaged in professional
conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation
in a rule to show cause proceeding in New Kent County
Circuit Court. The show cause proceeding arose due to
Mr. Henderson's failure to appear as defense counsel on
the scheduled second day of a criminal jury trial.

The Virginia State Bar Disciplinary Board suspended Lawrence
Bradford Haskin's license to practice law based on a disability.
The action was by agreement of the bar, Mr. Haskin, and
his guardian ad litem. The suspension will remain in place
until further order of the board.

On
February 21, 2003, a panel of the Third District Committee,
Section II, issued a public reprimand for Robert Henry
Smallenberg. The panel found that Mr. Smallenberg
intentionally prejudiced or damaged his client during
the course of the professional relationship.

*On
March 3, 2003, Mr. Smallenberg filed an appeal to
the Circuit Court.

On
February 20, 2003, a three-judge panel of the Circuit
Court of the City of Newport News revoked Samuel B. Davis,
Jr.'s law license. The court found that on repeated occasions
Mr. Davis willfully failed to comply with his obligations
as administrator of an estate. The evidence established
that Mr. Davis filed frivolous motions, summonsed witnesses
who had no connection to the case, and willfully disobeyed
a circuit court order. The three-judge panel ruled unanimously
that the willful, deliberate and repeated nature of Mr.
Davis's violations warranted the revocation of his license
to practice law.

On
February 9, 2003, pursuant to agreed dispositions, a subcommittee
of the Fifth District Committee, Section I, issued two
public reprimands with terms to John Wayne Bevis for a
pattern of neglect in a divorce case and a real estate
contract case. Mr. Bevis also failed to communicate with
his clients in both cases.

On
February 7, 2003, the Virginia State Bar Disciplinary
Board approved an agreed disposition of disciplinary charges
against Wesley Lee Pendergrass.The agreement
provides for a one-year suspension of Mr. Pendergrass's
license to practice law but suspends imposition of the
sanction conditioned upon his engaging in no further misconduct
for one year. The charges concerned Mr. Pendergrass' failure
to perfect an appeal for a court-appointed client and
his failure to advise the client that the appeal was dismissed
because of his error. In approving the agreed disposition,
the board considered Mr. Pendergrass' prior disciplinary
record, which includes four findings of misconduct.

On
February 5, 2003, the Virginia State Bar Disciplinary
Board summarily suspended Harvey L. Lasky's license to
practice law in Virginia. The action was based on the
decision of the Supreme Court of the State of New Jersey
to suspend his New Jersey license for six months. The
board ordered Mr. Lasky to appear on February 28, 2003,
to show cause his Virginia license should not be suspended
for six months.

On January
30, 2003, the Virginia State Bar Disciplinary Board summarily
suspended Edward Joseph Hodkinson's license to practice
law in Virginia. The suspension was based on the indefinite
suspension of his Massachusetts license by the Supreme
Judicial Court for Suffolk County. The board ordered Mr.
Hodkinson to appear on February 28, 2003, to show cause
why his Virginia license should not be suspended indefinitely.

On
January 29, 2003, a subcommittee of the Fifth District
Committee, Section II issued a public reprimand with terms
to Robert Michael Short. The subcommittee found that he
did not handle a personal injury action diligently and
promptly and did not communicate with his client.

This
was an agreed disposition of disciplinary charges against
Mr. Short.

On
January 29, 2003, the Virginia State Bar Disciplinary
Board suspended Benjamin Thomas Reed's license to practice
law for thirty days, effective April 15, 2003. This was
an agreed disposition of disciplinary charges against
Mr. Reed. Mr. Reed stipulated that he neglected appeals
or post-trial motions in three court-appointed criminal
cases and in one of the three cases also failed to communicate
with a client. The parties agreed to dismiss two other
matters.

Charles
Daniel Chambliss, Jr. consented to the revocation of his
license to practice law in Virginia effective January
23, 2003. Mr. Chambliss acknowledged that he neglected
four client matters, did not communicate with some clients
and failed to comply with disciplinary rules governing
attorney trust accounts. Mr. Chambliss also acknowledged
that he did not respond to the bar's repeated requests
for information about the cases and his attorney trust
account, thereby obstructing the bar's investigation of
the misconduct allegations.

January
8, 2003

Dale
Alan Gipe, 3610 Marquette Road, Richmond, Virginia 23234.

VSB
Docket Nos. 99-031-3026, 02-031-1879 and 02-031-3666

On
January 6, 2003, pursuant to an agreed disposition, the
Third District Committee, Section I, publicly reprimanded
Dale Alan Gipe for neglecting a bankruptcy matter and
failing to communicate with his client, and in two other
matters for failing to act in a reasonably diligent manner
and properly supervise a non-lawyer employee.

On
December 2, 2002, the Disciplinary Board suspended Mr.
Hinde's license to practice law in the Commonwealth of
Virginia after he failed to comply fully with subpoenae
duces tecum requiring production of client files and trust
account records. On December 13, 2002, the Disciplinary
Board lifted the interim suspension following Mr. Hinde's
production of additional documents on December 12, 2002,
and execution of a certification indicating that he had
not produced certain trust account records.

On January 7, 2003, pursuant to an agreed disposition,
the Virginia State Bar Disciplinary Board suspended Francis
Douglas Foord's license to practice law for a period of
thirty days, effective February 1, 2003. Among other acts
of misconduct, Mr. Foord neglected a client's personal
injury claim and failed to communicate with the client;
lost or misplaced documentary evidence furnished him by
clients for use at trial; failed to act with reasonable
diligence while representing a criminal defendant; and
failed to respond to bar complaints and to requests for
information made by a Virginia State Bar investigator.

On
January 7, 2003, the Virginia State Bar Disciplinary Board
summarily suspended Clifford John Quinn's license to practice
law in Virginia. The suspension was based upon Mr. Quinn's
conviction on September 12, 2002, of several felonies
in the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland. Mr. Quinn was ordered to appear before the board
on January 24, 2003, to determine whether his license
should be revoked or further suspended.

The
Disciplinary Board continued this matter until Friday,
March 28, 2003.

*On
March 28, 2003, Clifford John Quinn consented to the revocation
of his license to practice law.